Bulletin Board #23

#1 SCANNER
From: "M. GERON"

Colleagues,
I have purchased an AOR, AR8000 scanner, frequency coverage 500kHz thru 1900MHz (no gaps), AM, USB, LSB, CW, NFM, and WFM. I would appreciate any information/tips regarding possible use for counter surveillance, and any publications I can order to assist me learn would be appreciated too.

Thank you all for your time.

Regards
Michael Geron
F. & M. GERON (1979) LTD. (ISRAEL GMT +3) Investigative & Related Services
Michael Geron, F.IPI,ABI,NALI,IKD - Fred Geron, LL.B.
Tel. +972 9 7441810, Fax. +972 9 7440663, Email. m_geron@netvision.net.il



Tim Responded

Michael,
I haven't used that unit before, but these are some things you may be able to do with it:

First, it can do an automatic scan--you set the start frequency and it will scan until it hits a signal. In doing a tscm sweep, you have to look at ALL the signals when working with a scanner (unless you have the capability of identifying signals and programming the scanner to disregard them).

I have a radio shack Pro 29 scanner and often use it to double check the audio on a signal I am curious about. Also, I use it to verify the audio component when I am using the Optoelectronics Scout Frequency Counter as a near field detector.

Hope this helps some. I'll post your request to the list later on.

Tim



#2 Body Wire

From: Tim Johnson
Subject: Body Wire

I have an associate who has a legal requirement for a body wire system.

His company's business is performing legal undercover operations for major corporations, utilizing video and personnel to detect theft, drug use and other illegal activity within an organization. In order to provide for the safety of their personnel, they wish to purchase several transmit/receive/record systems. At present, the only provider they are aware of are the ones that will sell only to law enforcement.

If you know of providers of such systems who can legally sell to private industry, please provide me with a telephone number and/or name. They are interested in a minimum of 2 and probably 4 sets at this time wit other orders to follow.

For you folks having a requirement for such service I'll be glad to put you in contact with Harry. I'll also ask him to provide some info for your files and future use (Harry, have your company put something together that I can provide to the list). (Ain't e-mail the greatest thing ever :>) )

Thanks in advance

Tim



#3

From: Kelleypi@aol.com
Jack Kely provided this.

Forwarded message:
From: jross@rosseng.com (James A. Ross)
Subject: Privacy and Security 2001, May 1997

Jim Ross wrote:
Note:

This letter is sent to a list of people who have asked for it and to some people who have had their addresses given to us as people who would be interested in it.

If you have no interest, please advise us, and we'll immediately remove your address.

Privacy and Security 2001SM
Everyman's guide to coping in the modern, high-tech world

Volume XIV, Number 5 Yogo 13.05 May, 1997

Reminder: Your ultimate loss of privacy and security occurs when they kill you.

VALUES
Introduction. From time to time a reader will ask me why I'm writing about politics, and I then go into my lecture that I have scant interest in politics; I'm concerned for my country, its values, its people and their values. I'm concerned because of the terrible changes that have taken place in my lifetime, and I want to do whatever I can do to turn the trend around. Our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren are entitled to live in a better world than we live in now. They deserve the kind of privacy and security that our ancestors enjoyed.

In WW II the army was used to protect our country from enemies; now we find that our perverted government actually used army troops against our own people when we killed all those people in that church outside Waco. After I watched that horrible fire on the TV news, I added the new subheading (above) to this letter, and I broadened the scope of the letter to include consideration of more than just the electronic attacks on privacy and security.

Before getting into specific details, here's one thought that occurred to me recently. I saw a sign at a parking area that said "Park at Your Own Risk"; and I couldn't help thinking that, when I was a kid, we did everything at our own risk. We did not have dozens of federal agencies making up regulations to "protect" us. In those days lawbreakers ended up in jail, and those who cheated on business deals were soon out of business, and those who cheated on their spouses were not accepted, and we felt sorry for those who chose strange lifestyles (not celebrated as the two homosexual women at the White House Correspondents dinner the other night), etc.

Values on High.
There was an interesting contrast in values revealed in two news stories the other day. In one we learned how John Huang received 109 classified briefings - including Top Secret reports. This man, apparently with no clearance or need to know, was provided national defense information that undoubtedly was of immense value to his far eastern pals who, in turn, donated millions to the DNC and Democrat candidates' campaign funds.

Meanwhile, Representative Dan Burton, whose committee will be holding hearings on the campaign donation scandals, is told by a White House flack that he must provide an iron-clad agreement that none of the information provided by the White House may ever be revealed to the citizens of this country. When asked about this at a press conference, Michael McCurry tossed a quarter to a reporter and said "Go call him. Tell him to come on down here, and he can look at any document he wants to. We've been telling him that repeatedly now for weeks, that we're not holding anything back from him; we just don't want Chairman Burton or any of his staff investigators to pass documents out on the street corners that shouldn't properly be in the public domain."

OK. The White House thinks it's all right if foreign powers get to see vital defense information that is classified top secret; but we, the citizens, cannot see unclassified information that relates to the bribes received to pay for access to that top secret information.

Personally, I think it's time that the citizens of this country let those arrogant children in the White House know just who it is they work for.

Other Values.
Considering the contrasting values of drivers on the road is interesting. In the Ft. Lauderdale area we saw cars weaving from lane to lane sometimes with only inches of clearance. In Chicago, as we waited in the proper lane for the backed up traffic to allow us to enter the turn-off lane we could see ahead, we saw cars passing us on the right shoulder, and many of them were continuing on the shoulder (past the turn-off lane) until they could squeeze back into a through lane further ahead.

In Oshkosh, on the other hand, I was frequently momentarily confused, but I never once heard a horn blaring at me or saw a finger or a fist raised to me. Signalling for a left turn off a two lane road resulted in cars waiting patiently for us to get our of their way, not angry, in-a-hurry motorists leaning on horns.

Back to Politics.
Yes, I have scant interest, but I honestly believe the proper road back to freedom is by way of carefully electing principled politicians rather than those who try to buy votes with giveaway programs or the bleeding hearts who actually believe in the giveaway programs. To do that we need honest, competent major news media - see next segment for commentary on that.

NEWS MEDIA

Foreword.

We're all influenced by everything we experience and all of the information that enters our brain - no question about that. However, considering the dramatic difference between news media and other reports on the same event, I wonder how much the average thinking person is swayed by non-real "news".

I'm addressing this segment of this letter to open-minded people - those who report the news as well as those who follow the news - in an effort to get them to examine "news" reports critically. I'm doing this because I think we're being led down a very slippery slope by some crafty people and by some unthinking people.

Personal Prejudice.
Let me, at the outset, be totally honest about my feelings toward the news media. I think real news that is withheld and misinformation that is propagated by the most of the news media is the reason that our country is in the horrible shape it is in. In support of that statement I ask you to look back at how the major media covered up (or outright ignored) the lack of any ethical standards by the bunch now in the White House. Scandals abound, but the major media seem to have no continuing interest; they cover a scandal one day and the next are totally diverted by some non-newsworthy activities designed to take advantage of their extremely short attention span.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand how they just drop consideration of a major story when it is obvious that the whole story has not been told. The killings at Waco is a good example of how the news media just dropped the ball. More recently, we saw news of a commercial airliner that was shot down by a missile observed by hundreds of people. Yet, the news media merely carry the party line offered by the government rather than digging out the truth.

Our perceptions of what's right and what's wrong, and what is really happening, are perverted by the press's lack of determination to stick to a story until the truth is out. Let's look at some real examples of bad journalism - some dealing with vital stories, some dealing with some stuff that's really dumb.

168 vs. 169.
Yes, I can certainly understand why the federal government repeats the untruth that 168 people were killed in the OKC bombing. It's simple. If the government told the truth, namely that 169 people died and the 169th has never been identified, that would work to the advantage of the defense, supporting the probability that there was more than one bomb.

What I cannot understand is why the news media all repeat the falsehood of 168 deaths. Are the news media 100% against getting to the truth of what really happened?

The CIA's "War" in Laos.
The Washington Times recently reported that "a secret army fought under CIA command in Laos during the Vietnam War." The report said the 40,000 Hmong (I don't know if that is a nation, a tribe, a religion, or what.) fought and that 20,000 of them died for the cause.

I am astounded at the lack of continuous and detailed press coverage of his "war" for several reasons.
How in the world did the president get away with deciding to grant the CIA the authority to wage war?
Why has there been no press outcry over this illegal activity?
Does no one in the press see anything wrong with the CIA commanding a foreign force in an undeclared war in a country not at war with the United States?
Having half of the fighting force killed would seem to indicate that the CIA should stick to - well, whatever it's supposed to do. It certainly failed in this attempt at war making.

Re Newt Gingrich.
After investigating scores of charges against him, the house ethics committee found that he might have been involved in improper use of some 501(c)(3) funds. This is a slap-on-the-wrist type of an offense, if it actually did occur; but the press reports have apparently swayed some people who now believe he is some kind of a crook - like Rostenkowski.

The facts are that some 501(c)(3) funds may have been used to distribute tapes of his college course, and, if the IRS concludes that course was "partisan political activity", he acted incorrectly. There was no crime committed; the 501(c)(3) organization may lose its tax free status if it is involved in such things as a matter of course. However, some people are too lazy - or too prejudiced to bother to learn what 501(c)(3) means; they just assume that all those pages printed about Newt MUST mean he's guilty as sin of some crime and go into print with that conclusion. Examples:
Tricia Walsh McGlone, Editor of PTN Publishing's LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGY states "...what he did was basically steal money and then lie about it".
In the May/June issue of ADPA's National DEFENSE the lead editorial comment says "...Gingrich's departure is no longer a question of if, but rather of when."

It appears that these people, whose writings also influence other people, have been convinced by the left-leaning socialistic "news"papers that Newt is some kind of a criminal. My message to every writer considering emulating these two is: "Get off your duff and spend a little effort to determine facts before writing fiction and calling it fact."



Air Bags.
Yes siree, those federally mandated air bags are there to save us from ourselves, and, no, we can't turn them off because they have saved 1100, no 1200, no 1700 lives against only 62 people killed by them.

I ask those who spout the number of lives saved: "Why are you being so modest? You're lying anyway because only God Himself knows if ANY lives have been saved. So, while you're making up numbers, why not give us big ones, not rounded off, say 3,763 lives have been saved?" That's a more impressive number and a more believable number than the nice, round 1100, 1200 and 1700 we've been hearing."

One fact is certain, though. Every person killed by an air bag is dead, no question. And the use of the word "only" in front of the number dead is horrible. Those who have been killed by air bags are dead. Don't tell the mother whose infant's head was blown off in a bumper touching incident in a parking lot about how these bags are good for us.

The key question here is why does the press not think and question such stupidities as these. Is there no one in the major media with the ability to understand that we've been fed bureaucratic baloney?

Article by Nicholas D. Kristof, NY Times News Service.
This "news" article reports that the recent international date line move means Kiribati "...will be first nation to usher the world into the next millennium" on January 1, 2000. Too bad the New York Times can't afford to hire someone who can count to one hundred and then to one thousand. Maybe they could all take off their shoes and count all the fingers and toes and thus learn that the year 2000 is the LAST year of the second millennium and not the FIRST year of anything.

The conclusion stated in this article demonstrates the New York Times' unconcern for even simple facts. ala NPR. The other morning NPR presented the results of its investigative efforts regarding the floods that have ravaged parts of our country. The NPR reporter queried experts on why the floods occurred, and the experts explained it all for us. In one case they said snow caused more water than the river could hold, and in another case they said rain caused more water than the river could hold. Isn't it just great that this tax-dollar-funded organization enlightened us that way?

REAL Investigative Reporting.
Speaking of weather, wouldn't you think that NPR, or SOME news organization would be questioning our government's attempt to control weather with its HAARP project in Alaska? Here we have an absolutely stupid activity by our federal government that is wasting money by the barrelful. It doesn't really matter whether it can be proven that HAARP activities have actually modified weather in such a way that innocent people have been killed, others losing their farms, homes and possessions; THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS NO BUSINESS INTERFERING WITH GOD'S WORK.

However, no news group seem to want to become famous by exposing this farcical activity (or the other attempts to modify weather that have been initiated by some states - according to reports on the Web). Maybe all these news organizations are as constrained as Ted Koppel who told Reed Irvine they could do no real research because he has a staff of only 50 people. My God, what a travesty! Hugh Sprunt has no research staff, but he created a 300 plus page opus on the death of Vince Foster - a report so complete and so detailed as to make the government's efforts look like a kindergartner's effort.

Personally, I think the question is whether Ted Koppel is in the news business or the propaganda business.

TWA Flight 800.
An airliner gets shot down - observed by hundreds of witnesses - and our government tells us, after a detailed investigation, that it had a catastrophic failure. Wow, that's as good as NPR's report that the flooding occurred because there was too much water in the river. Can it be that our government and press think we are incapable of accepting the truth, that maybe given facts we'd have a country-wide nervous breakdown?

Posed Photo Op.
The Washington Times is a newspaper that, in general, covers news with a careful eye so all of the socialistic propaganda from on high doesn't make it into print. However, there are times when this conservative paper falls for a newspeak piece from one of the wire services. For instance, in the very recent past, it published a picture in color on page 1 of Hillary and Chelsea looking though field glasses while on their jaunt through Africa. The caption commented about how they were enjoying the view of the hippopotamuses; but, considering the way the glasses were aimed, we suggest that a more appropriate (and honest) caption would have pointed out that they were looking at the top of the photographers head while posing for a fake photograph..

Press Ignores General's Major Goof.
The press has had a field day with the troubles of Lt. Kelly Flinn (accused of adultery, lying under oath, and disobeying a direct order). This story generated a lot of hot arguments, but there has not been one word about how the USAF Chief of Staff's conduct made it impossible for her to be court marshalled. Here's what the press ignored.

While testifying before a congressional committee General Ronald R. Fogelman said: "This is an issue about an officer ... who disobeyed an order, who lied." That statement of the guilt of the accused by the senior USAF officer meant that Lt. Kelly Flinn could not be court marshalled by the USAF because, once their commanding general pronounced her guilty, no unbiased court of officers could be convened.

Because the news media totally ignored this enormous gaffe, I conclude that no one with any clout in the news media has any military service. Where's the diversity? OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
(AND THE QUESTION OF WHO
YOU ARE WILLING TO WORK FOR)

Would You Work for a Person Who Is Under Investigation? This topic was mentioned in our March letter because one of our licensees had forwarded comments to us by a man who expressed some very prejudiced thoughts on the subject. In his twisted view those of us who work in TSCM have the magic ability to determine whether any eavesdropping system we uncover is 1) illegal, or 2) a government law enforcement agency's installed under the authority of a court order. He seems to be of the opinion that ALL eavesdropping systems MUST be government operations, and therefore when we find and remove said systems, we are criminals conspiring to obstruct justice and some angry men in black suits are going to put us away.

In the real world, there is no way to determine who did the work. (Except for that tailing beacon that was found on a road in Pennsylvania with the DA's name and address engraved on it!) In fact, when I'm working in a closet that has a cover over some wiring with a message on it that says something to the effect that this cannot be touched by anyone other than a so-and-so telephone company employee, that's the first place I inspect.

The question of who would you work for came up during a seminar I led in the Sportsman's Lodge in North Hollywood about fifteen years ago. We had a good discussion during class, but Gerry Klein invited everyone to dinner, and we went over the topic at length. The consensus was: a person has not lost his right to professional help because he is under investigation. Later, I asked the question of lawyers, and of course their answer was the same. (After all, they work all the time for people under investigation.)

Since that time, I know our teams have at times worked for people who were under investigation, and I have absolutely no feeling of guilt about those efforts. We were hired to do a job, and we did the job to the best of our ability. At any time we feel we cannot do our work properly because of concern for the legality of the business we are asked to work for, we'll just turn down the job. Once we have gone to work for a company our loyalty belongs to that client - unless events prove us wrong, in which case we'll withdraw.

Another (valid) Point of View. I know there are other people who have other ideas, ideas sometimes much more stringent than a mere consideration of possible obstruction of justice charges. For instance, I was once contacted to do TSCM in a legal (grandfathered, I was told) gambling club in California, and I tried to refer it to a respected and competent professional there, a friend of many years. However, he refused it because his government career had been in the prosecutor's office, and he simply would not consider working for someone on whom, in his former life, he might have been installing court-approved surveillance. I can in no wa criticize him. I understand his reasoning, and I respect him for standing up for what he believes in.

Because he could not handle it, I personally did the job and it was VERY interesting. I came upon two signals I had never seen before - one took the better part of the day to figure out, and that story now is one of the anecdotes that spice up my training course and seminar. (Stay tuned; we'll be offering a video on this phenomenon.)

P.S. My colleague in California later sent me a clipping detailing the results of a criminal investigation and trial of the owners of this club. I have forgotten the details, but the owners apparently weren't satisfied with their fabulous earnings in a legal gambling club, they had to add some illegal twists to their offerings. Ah well.

SAIG

The Security and Investigations Group (SAIG) has been organized as a membership association, and we're working on the (ugh) paperwork to achieve IRS recognition as a 501(c)(3) non-profit. Although we have not yet solicited members, we've had positive response to the idea from a lot of people. Many have offered to provide articles on operations in their fields, and we've had questions about a data base on sources of equipment, training, etc.

To obviate the kind of criticism ASIS is getting for offering membership to anyone with "an ongoing interest in the security profession" we're planning to initially offer only the associate level of membership and later have those pioneer members establish higher levels (based on experience, testing, etc.) with appropriate higher dues and benefits. Sure, the door is open for ANYONE to join SAIG, but only those with special qualifications will be allowed into the higher membership categories.

Speaking of ASIS and its problems, we note the way foreign members have been neglected by ASIS (as detailed in EuroDynamics) and promise that SAIG will respect and be loyal to all members, regardless of address. It's hard to imagine why paid employees ignore pleas for information and help from overseas volunteers working on their own time and paying their own expenses.

If you have any ideas about the specialties in security and investigations that should be recognized by SAIG, or about benefits for members, or levels of membership, or any aspect of getting this fledgling organization up and running, we'd certainly like to hear from you.

Invitations will be going out soon to those who have inquired about joining. If you would like to receive an invitation, contact us right away there ARE incentives for joining early.

MESSAGE TO OUR EMAIL READERS

A short time ago I managed to completely lose an electronic copy of this newsletter. I do not remember how I accomplished that feat. I've been doing these since 1984, and never lost one before, but somehow I tricked the machine into eating the March issue.

Here's the good part. I sent a quick message out to all on the list, asking for a copy to be emailed back to me. Wow! What a wonderful group of people we correspond with. Copies began to come back within hours. We kept addresses so we could send individual thanks, but gave up when the count went over one hundred.

So here's our THANKS to all of you who responded; you're very thoughtful (and isn't this a wonderful communication medium).



The above is provided for informaion only to those on the list. TSCI neither endorses or disapproves of the comments made by Mr. Ross. Your views and comments are welcomed for the benifit of other memebers of the list. Your identity will not be provided if you so request.

Tim (the moderator)



#4 (From # 2 Son)

Subject: The Russian Approach to Combat Aerial Delivery

Earlier this year, the dazed crew of a Japanese Trawler were recovered off the Sea of Japan clinging to the wreckage of their sunken ship. Their rescue, however, was followed by immediate imprisonment once authorities questioned the sailors on their ship's loss. They claimed that a cow, falling out of the clear blue sky, had struck the trawler amidships, shattering it's hull and sinking the vessel within minutes.

They remained in prison for several weeks, until the Russian Air Force reluctantly informed Japanese authorities that the crew of one of its cargo planes had apparently stolen a cow wandering at the edge of a Siberian airfield...forced the cow into the plane's hold and hastily departed for home. Unprepared for live cargo, the Russian crew was ill-equipped to manage a rampaging cow within its hold. To save the aircraft and themselves, they shoved the animal out of the cargo hold as they crossed the Sea of Japan at an altitude of 30,000 feet.
(True story)



#5 Subject: For Sale - Electronic Countermeasures Instrumentation

From: "Kevin D. Murray"

For Sale: Electronic Countermeasures Instrumentation
Mgf: Technical Services Agency (TSA)
Condition: Good to Excellent


Items:

Spectrum Analyzer, Model SA-5, original cost $4350. (c.1988)

Acoustic Rangefinder, Range Lock 3801, original cost $750. (c.1988)

Carrier Current Receiver, Line Lock CCR-3, original cost $1150. (c.1988)

Scanlock Receiver, Mark V, original cost $4150. (c.1976)

Total Cost New $10,400.

Owner will sell as lot, or by piece.

Brokered by:
Murray Associates
PO Box 668
Oldwick, NJ 08858

RSVP: murray@spy.busters.com with offers.



While we're on the subject of Used TSCM equipment, I have available an ETA-1 Telephone analyzer and an ECR-1 Spectrum Analyzer, both sold by ISA and both in very good condition. Make a reasonable offer and I'll pass it on to the company who owns it.

Tim
dbugman@amug.org



Well, that pretty much concludes things for this issue.

I finally got caught up from our vacation. (Did I get everyone mad at me for taking off for two weeks? I returned and for more than a month I only had off three days. Some days I was even doing two jobs a day in the local area.) :>)

Tim Johnson